Islam Needs Reforming, but Certainly No Reformation

Posted by dbhalling 5 years, 3 months ago to Politics
61 comments | Share | Flag

“He who wants to be a Christian must tear the eyes out of his reason.” Martin Luther

Christianity and Islam are not the different - It was the introduction of reason, not christianity that defines the West.
SOURCE URL: http://www.thesavvystreet.com/islam-needs-reforming-but-certainly-no-reformation/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by DavidKelley 5 years, 3 months ago
    As usual, Stephen Hicks's article on Islam is on the mark. A fuller treatment of the issue is my article (which he cites), "Does Islam Need a Reformation?" [http://atlassociety.org/commentary/mo....

    "In short, Islam does not need a Reformation. The problem is that it’s having one now. What it needs is an Enlightenment."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
      Thanks,

      Hear Hear
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 3 months ago
        They have a bad habit of killing off the opposition quite rapidly even more so than did the Catholics and then later on the Protestants. The lineage fro the Jewish religion down through the various forms of Christian versions or reformed is the same as changing the plan, the universal or the frame....and the Islamica religion has more than one ominous parallel.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 5 years, 3 months ago
    The West is certainly not free from the battle for reason over Biblical interpretations, or reading the entrails of chickens, or the thinking of the Fed, or the financial history charts of Wall St, or the emotional appeal to 'It's for the Children' or the dogs and cats, etc., etc.. .

    We often talk about the 'Battle for the Minds of Men', but I'm convinced that we would be better off battling for the survival of 'Men with Minds. Few of us really grasp who the enemy really is that we face on a daily basis, or that we can't educate mankind in total out of the battle. We must retreat into a defensive stance that may well take generations to come to even a stalemate, but as long as we think that the rest of mankind can be led out of or even pulled out of the quagmire of living without their minds, attrition will destroy us. There is no realistic path towards winning this battle. There is only getting out of the way of the train wreck, whether it's Islam, Christianity, or care for your fellow man.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
      Or reiki
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 5 years, 3 months ago
        Yep, that fits.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
          K & I had some casual friends down here and right after we had published POJ we had dinner with them. The woman in this couple was a yoga instructor and they ran a restaurant together. I knew she was also a reiki masseuse, but we seemed to have truce not to talk about it. Well K started talking about reiki to her, we also had a friend of K's there. K said her purpose was to show her friend that this was all nonsense. I walked away from the conversation, but about 15 minutes of trying to ignore this BS and I had enough. It did not end well
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Zenphamy 5 years, 3 months ago
            I can imagine the ending. A lady friend of mine in Raleigh Hills, Or (Portland) hosted a get together for a Reiki group in the early 90's. They'd invited a 'Master' from Africa and were presenting him all around. I came in early, not knowing about the group. Before I could even be introduced to the group, the 'Master' came running across the room nearly bowing, exclaiming that my 'aura' gleamed like a "multi-hued spot light" and that my energy flow was the most powerful and balanced he'd ever encountered.

            Not being quite as brusque as I am now, I kind of played along as if, of course I knew this, even telling the 'Master' that it often interfered with my ability to perceive others auras. I couldn't manage to escape him for the rest of the evening, and I really wanted to--his BO vastly overcame his 'aura'. But at the end of the evening, to the applause of his disciples, he proclaimed me a natural "Master", much to the amusement of a couple of my friends that had also stopped by.

            I spent the next 6 mos passing on invites from the rest of the Portland Reiki scene and turning down several opportunities to 'adjust the energy flows' of several of the single ladies in the group and others that heard of this "miracle man". The really sad part was calls from one lady with terminal cancer and another in the final stages of HIV/AIDS.

            I nearly had to fire my Office Manager for the hilarity she found in not side railing the phone calls. The humor quickly faded on my part.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
              LOL but of course irrationalism leads to the sad points you make at the end.

              The couple I was talking about hated the christians coming in a preaching. I pointed out that rieki was exactly like christian laying on of hands. The contradiction escaped them.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 5 years, 3 months ago
    Nice article.

    “He who wants to be a Christian must tear the eyes out of his reason.” Martin Luther

    Interesting quote, but IMHO, when Luther made that statement he could have just as easily said “He who wants to be a Catholic must tear the eyes out of his reason.” because “Christian” and “Catholic” in his time and place would have meant the same thing. However, his protest and the protestant movement he gave birth to was an argument that “Christian” and “Catholic” were not the same thing and the two terms needed to be separated. He was an educated man who had read the words of Jesus Christ and effectively was holding a copy of the New Testament in one hand and pointing a finger at the Church rulers with the other and saying “Hey guys, somehow I don’t think what you are doing is what the founder of this outfit had in mind.” The Christianity of Jesus Christ had, over those 1500 years, morphed into something Jesus would never had approved of.

    A contemporary example is Americans who are effectively holding up a copy of the Constitution and are pointing a finger at their rulers saying “Hey guys, somehow I don’t think what you are doing is what the founders of this outfit had in mind.” It’s had 200 years of morphing.

    Now, “Christianity” or rather “Christendom” as I’d prefer because I contend there is or should be a difference in the definitions of those terms, has been rediscovering its roots over the 500 years since Luther’s time and even the Catholic Church is far more “Christian” than it was in those days.

    I contend the statement “Christianity and Islam are not that different” is a false statement. Simply compare the teachings of the founders of those respective outfits and the differences would be quite clear to see. I say there was a time in history when Christendom and Islam were very similar, but Christianity and Islam were never similar.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 5 years, 3 months ago
    Islam is a religion cobbled together from Judaism and Christianity. The similarity to Orthodox Judaism. is unmistakable. However, Mohammed included his own brand of barbarity into it and it hasn't changed in practice much since then. It remains a primitive Dark Ages creed meant for an age long passed. It needs to be brought up to date, but its very appeal depends much on its barbarity. As long as Sharia remains the rules of the religion/political system there is no possible way to bring it into the 21st century.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 3 months ago
    The whole idea of Religion is BAD. Its the abdication of reason and the adoption of blind faith as determined by some prophet a long time ago.

    Islam adds to that intolerance with non believers and violence against them. Makes Islam VERY BAD.

    I want nothing to do with Muslims at this point until they at least drop the intolerance and violence from their beliefs.

    Politically incorrect as it may be, thats what I think, and I certainly dont want a bunch of syrian "refugees" being given a free ride in the USA courtesy of MY tax dollars.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 5 years, 3 months ago
    Wow, that is not the brave goody two shoes Martin Luther I was taught about in an Alabama elementary school back in the 50s and I cannot recall anything else taught after that.
    I grew up as a Catholic minority kid. Three or four nuns would come the church's adjacent Sunday school house and teach the Catechism for a couple of weeks every summer.
    The one who said Martin Luther burns in hell may have been right.
    I kinda doubted it at the time.
    An elementary school teacher had already pointed out there is no Purgatory in the Bible for medieval people to buy your way out of.
    So did Martin Luther.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mia767ca 5 years, 3 months ago
    excellent article that focuses on what specifically is wrong with vague calls for "change" and what the those calling for change (Obama) have in mind...stay focused on the message and whether the "changer" is being specific or evasive...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by IamThereforeIThink 5 years, 3 months ago
    If you pinpoint the issue:
    which is mysticism
    you eliminate almost all this debate;
    If that is really what you want to do
    (which I don't think it is)

    Stirring the pot/poking the glowing embers
    only adds fuel/flavor to obsolete dogma.
    Let it die the anti-intellectual death it deserves.
    'Western culture' is still mostly creatures on their
    knees in submission to something or other.
    ...keep the conversation going Mr.dbhalling et al.
    However,
    for others that know the meaning of Ayn Rand's
    term Man-Worship there is an outlet away
    from any speck of the
    mystic/altruist/collectivist
    and begins every day with
    Reason/Egoist/Capitalist
    as the moral premise.
    ...psycho-socially- an intellectual awakening.
    Come and see it all for yourself.
    In June, of course:
    Inform yourself here:

    www.GaltsGulchPortal.blogspot.com
    ou en Français:
    www.RefugeCanyonDeGalt.blogspot.ça
    Spanish to come.

    And I mean it.
    JohnGalt Iamoura
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 5 years, 3 months ago
    One could argue, based on the Christian experience, that Islam is in the throes of reformation. Just as in the Christian reformation, the established faith hierarchy was challenged aggressively by radical extremists, with more than a century of bloody warfare before the force of reason came to bear, the current radical explosion may have to reach the point where reason begins to hold sway in Muslim society.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 3 months ago
      Perhaps, but the fundamental tenets are so vastly different as to render comparisons of projected behaviors to be extremely problematic. Predictions of future behaviors are based on beliefs which emanate as actions. The Enlightenment which happened in Europe happened in spite of a few power-hungry tyrants who had used the apparatus of the Catholic Church to enrich and empower themselves; the general populace was peaceful. The Islamic faith has no such peaceful populace to allow for such ideas, and in fact actively works to prevent any and all such.

      While I would welcome an Enlightenment among the nations dominated by Islam, such is the antithesis of their religious ideals. While Christianity survived - and one could argue thrived - after Enlightenment, I do not see such prospects from such a conflict in Islam.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 3 months ago
    Yes, I agree with every part of the article: Galileos, Lockes, and Voltaires; NOT Luthers and Calvins.

    When people want to dismiss Enlightenment values, they talk about "Western medicine" or "Western" notions of liberty, as if to say people on one side of the world push their regional preferences on others. But developing models to understand the world based on reason and observation is not a preference.

    Thank you, Mr. Stephen Hicks.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jimjamesjames 5 years, 3 months ago
    A "belief," by definition, is neither truth nor fact, but it is powerful because it fills a need in the individual. There's something missing in their life: self respect, self esteem, a sense of being an individual. To quote Eric Hoffer: "Those who see their lives as spoiled and wasted crave equality and fraternity more than they do freedom. If they clamor for freedom, it is but freedom to establish equality and uniformity. The passion for equality is partly a passion for anonymity: to be one thread of the many which make up a tunic; one thread not distinguishable from the others. No one can then point us out, measure us against others and expose our inferiority."

    In other words, if I am in a mob, no one can point out my individual failure as an individual.

    Unless and until a sense of "self" takes primacy, any collective will fill the void.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 5 years, 3 months ago
    Islam was never about reason, islam is routed in pagan bicameralism, Old Testament Mysticism and never ascended into consciousness due to those mysticism's, their laws and politics.
    Many do not get it but the Old Testament was not a religion...it was history.
    Christianity was made into a religion and in doing so, surrendered the teachings to the same ole problems of whom have leaded that organization of the teachings. They too were pre-conscious bicamerally mystified.
    That's not what Jesus was about. He derailed the religious leaders of Israel. It was not about a church. It was about moral behavior and using a growing connection to the mind to control the very temptations of the bicameral brain.
    Did you know he advocated;...hold on to your hats here..."Rational Self Interest"? He spoke to a person on the road that passed right by someone by it's side that needed help and said something to this effect: You should help those fallen by the road side because someday you yourself might find yourself there. That in my mind, is rational self interest...not selflessness, not love but mutuality in your own interest.

    Now, islam does need to reform itself and the 109 subversive versus that command one to do harm to another.
    However, as I have studied and observed...we should all take an honest "Conscious" look at our history and the Conscious teachings of Jesus and take this whole moral thing, this image of how things have been created to reflect that image to a whole new level...eliminating this whole mystical bicameral speak and instead look to quantum physics and express what we do know and can logically assert at this time and be willing to adapt our understandings of the consequences of how creation was created with profound appreciation.

    This has become a sideline to my work on understanding mankind's conscious evolution and how it has effected our evolving paradigm.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 5 years, 3 months ago
    I could certainly see the principles of reason someday being packaged with the trappings of religion, for those who find such things comfortable. But we'd have to carefully avoid the whole list of fallacies that are most often used to sell religions, or it would not be reason.

    Islam, though, is much more than a religion. It is a political movement that demands to rule the whole world. That is why I call for a reformation. Remember that Christianity and even Judaism once had (in the Mosaic laws) rules such as death by stoning for apostasy. They cleaned up their act. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I see that as a much more attainable goal than having all religion go away.

    And I'm an atheist and have no ax to grind in favor of religion. I just believe that most religions these days are tame enough that we don't need to be at war with them.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
      That is a contradiction.

      "I just believe that most religions these days are tame enough that we don't need to be at war with them."

      Which religions are you talking about Islam, Christianity?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jdg 5 years, 3 months ago
        Mostly the various Christian and Jewish sects.

        The Jews don't even consider that their laws apply to anyone but themselves. I would love to see that view propagate to the rest.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 5 years, 3 months ago
        One that I know of .....they are too busy getting killed by the others. They have two branches though. One kills whales and the other kills or has killed people.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 3 months ago
    You take Luther's quote completely out of context. In his time, the only official "Christianity" was that peddled by the Catholic Church. Luther had read the Bible, however, and compared it to the teachings of the Catholic Church and saw significant doctrinal discrepancies. So he left the Catholic Church in disdain, believing in the Bible verse that said that God could not be the author of falsehood nor the representative of Christ's true doctrines.

    What led to the Enlightenment in the first place? It was the Reformers such as Luther, Calvin, and others who threw off the tyranny of the Catholic church and its extra-Biblical teachings in search of real truth. The Catholic Church actively persecuted scientific advancement because it undermined the traditions they had purportedly taught as doctrine, such as the idea of a flat world (the Greeks knew the earth was round and even calculated its circumference fairly remarkably given the tools), that the sun revolved around the Earth (the Mayans, Chinese, and others knew this to be false), and more. I would also point out that the printing press was created and its primary first use was publication not of scientific literature or news, but of the Bible. Once people began to read for themselves the true content of the Bible and compare it to Catholic teachings, it didn't take long for logical contradictions to surface. Only after the hegemony of the Catholic Church was broken (aided substantially by the cheap publication and dissemination of knowledge) did scientific progress begin to take off.

    And why were people flocking to leave Europe to head for America? Religious freedom first and foremost. They were fleeing the Church of England (created by a king because he didn't want to be constrained by the Catholic Church's doctrine on divorce) and the Catholic Church of Europe with whom they held dramatic theological differences. But they were still predominantly Christians - with "Christian" not being defined by membership in the Catholic Church, but by a belief in Jesus Christ. They certainly weren't reciting the Qu'ran.

    There were 252 documented suicide attacks last year alone. 250 were committed by adherents of Islam. Not a single one by a Christian. In fact, I don't know of a single suicide attack by a Christian in known history despite thousands upon thousands by Muslims, yet you want to claim that the two religions are the same? I would not have thought such blatant intellectual dishonesty from you. I'm very disappointed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
      Your standard excuse. You sound like the socialists when discussing Stalin or Mao or Lenin.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 3 months ago
        The first thing that comes out is a deflection followed by character assassination and strawman. Though I'm impressed you were able to cram all that into a single line, it still earns you a -1 for being absolutely void of substance or serious intellectual merit. If the only thing one can come up with is a dogmatic argument reliant on rebuttals of logical fallacy, it is a truly poor argument indeed.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
          Well quit repeating the same nonsense then. It is not a character assignation it is a statement of fact based on your repeated refusal to acknowledge history or facts as soon as your beloved christianity comes up I am just pointing out your irrationalism.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 3 months ago
            I presented history. I demonstrated how you were intentionally misusing the quote by avoiding context. And lastly I demonstrated the absolute fallacy of equation you made between Christianity and Islam. These are statements of fact to which you offered no logical rebuttal whatsoever. Instead, you replied with three logical fallacies: deflection, character assassination, and strawman. Now you've just added that I refuse to "acknowledge history" and that I am irrational. The score is Logical Fallacies: me 0, you -5; Logical Arguments: me 3, you 0.

            Now you can easily wipe that -5 off the board simply by apologizing. But to get points on the Logical Arguments board, you're going to actually have to present a real logical argument. You'd score big points by acknowledging that there is no equivalence between the various religions - regardless your opinion of them individually. I'm not arguing their merits or demerits, I'm pointing out that you are allowing your biases to lead you to unjustified and erroneous conclusions. And when these errant conclusions get pointed out, your first reaction is to justify your position by falling back on logical fallacy and accusing the one who points them out as illogical. If only the hypocrisy were not so blatantly obvious you might actually see it.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 5 years, 3 months ago
              Over and over you make this argument with Christianity - you have long lost your credibility.. I do not need to shoot down every argument that Global Warming prophets come up with to know they are spewing BS and the same is true with anti-patent religionists.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ Gonzotr 5 years, 3 months ago
            First, dbhalling, use periods. It is great to be here and debate rational thought. Your two statements, however, seem more loaded with emotion and anger, than reason. blarman made a good case for the flow of history regarding this. I challenge you to point out the " nonsense" you speak of.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by teri-amborn 5 years, 3 months ago
    I think that Martin Luther was referring to how the Catholic Church isn't really "Christian" at all. a

    In his day if you actually stop obeying them your reasoning toward self-preservation must go...(at least in his time...not so much now). They eventually killed Luther.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 3 months ago
      Correct. Luther himself was a devout Christian and one of the primary leaders of the Protestant movement - though he was not the founder of the sect that came to be known as the Lutherans. To twist his quote to say that Christianity is anti-reason is disingenuous at best.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Gonzotr 5 years, 3 months ago
    Not entirely true. Christians Brought reason and science forward a thousand years ago, partly because they wanted to recognize and explain their creator, and define it. Albeit, at times against a "christian" oligarchy, in the Catholic Church, that was driven as much by tradition as superstition as religion. This quote is not a statement of indictment, but in context, a statement of faith. If you do not use faith, you take it as a negative connotation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 5 years, 3 months ago
      A particular religion doesnt have to be all bad, and can incorporate SOME ideas based on facts. The idea of blind belief IS bad, however. Its my feeling that Mormons have good personal responsibility elements in their religion for example. Catholics dont have much reason in their religious beliefs, except perhaps some elements of the "10 commandments". I dont think much of Baptist religion at all. Jewish religion seems to be somewhat more practical than others.

      Islam seems to have some financical responsibility elements that are OK, but there is a lot of "control" nonsense relative to women mixed in there with intolerance and violence. I would say that overall, Islam is BS and BAD.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo